# A (gasp) aromatic review thread



## doctorthoss (Jun 28, 2010)

Hmmm... there's been a lot of review threads on various sites, some dealing with burlies or Va/Pers or latakia mixtures.... So, I was wondering, why not do one on aromatics? Aros are the most maligned genre of tobaccos among "serious" smokers....yet nonetheless they are the biggest selling type of pipe tobacco on the market. Why is that, I ask, and do as many of us truly despise aromatics as some would have us believe?

I've been smoking a pipe for 21 years now. For virtually all of that time, I have primarily smoked latakia mixtures or burlies, although in the last 5-6 years I've developed a deep appreciation for Va/Pers. But I've also smoked a good number of aromatics, and it wasn't until I started going to pipe-related web sites about 5 years ago that I realized that many of us seem to look down on aros. 

The reasons for that derision is actually pretty easy to explain: aromatics, especially the popular American types, are usually made of crappy tobacco that's been doused in some kind dessert-flavored syrup. These tobaccos tend to burn hot, they bite, they don't carry much flavor and they don't provide enough nicotine to satisfy. I agree wholeheartedly with those who argue that giving new pipe smokers an aromatic tobacco to "start out" with is a serious mistake, and may be one reason there are so few of us (especially when talking about those looking to transition from cigs to pipes).

On the other hand, I've smoked no small number of good aromatics over the years, and even a handful that I consider to be great! In fact, as I've gotten older, the more I find that I appreciate a genuinely well-crafted aromatic as much as I like the more natural blends. While I doubt that aros will ever be something I smoke more than, say, 10 percent of the time, I've come to love my select favorites as much as my Odyssey, Filmore or Blackwoods Flake. A well-crafted aromatic will have both a delicious flavoring and good smoking characteristics, and should also have at least some tobacco flavor, as well. Believe it or not, they ARE out there -- it's just that you've got to sort through a mountain of crap to find it.

So, I'm going to start a review thread on aros. My goal is NOT to sample every aro out there -- that would, in a word, suck. But I would like to assemble a decent list of quality aromatics that others can draw from when making their choices, and possibly broaden my horizons a bit. I'd love to hear suggestions, and I don't want to dominate all the reviews here -- please feel free to post any thoughts you have on aros, as well. I'd like to be able to create kind of a "touchstone" that smokers can refer to without having to scale a mountain of crappy blends, so the more input I get here the better!

Before getting on with this, however, I must deal with the thorny issue of defining an aromatic. This is not as easy as it may sound.... I can't just say that any flavored or topped tobacco is an aromatic, because my understanding (from GL Pease and others) is that virtually ALL tobaccos, even our beloved "natural" virginia flakes, have some added casing or flavorings (even if it was applied before the manufacturer got them and consists of little more than casing the leaf with sugar). So, what makes a tobacco an "aromatic"?

I'm going to tentatively propose the following definition: A tobacco is an aromatic if an added flavoring/topping/casing contributes materially to the flavor or aroma of the blend rather than simply enhancing the leaf's natural characteristics. So, FVF is not an aromatic even if it's sauced with a little sugar, as the sugar in that instance will enhance the VA's sweetness rather than adding a distinctive note on it's own. Conversely, I will count both Haddo's Delight and Barbary Coast as aromatics because the flavorings add a great deal to the overall experience. I'm also on the fence about including the Lakeland scented blends here .... on the one hand they are definitely aros, but on the other hand I'm not sure that they shouldn't have a thread all their own. I don't consider this definition of "aromatic" to be written in stone, and there will probably be a lot of blends that are hard to pigeonhole (C&D's Epiphany or Edgeworth RR, for instance, might prove hard to classify). But I need to start somewhere, and this sounds like a good place to start....

Anyhow, I'm going to start with one of my favorite aromatics, Just for Him's very popular Shortcut to Mushrooms. If anyone else shows enough interest in this thread for me to continue for long, I plan on introducting a ranking system, as well. 

Anyhow...

SHORTCUT TO MUSHROOMS

This is without a doubt one of the most unique tobaccos I've ever smoked. Not only does it actually taste somewhat like mushrooms, this improbable flavoring actually WORKS. Not only that, but it works in the presence of a decent amount of latakia! If you love the flavor of latakia but find yourself consigned to the garage because your family hates the smell, this is a pretty good compromise.

I'd love to know what the component tobaccos are. Latakia and some kind of dark cavendish are obviously the backbone here, but I think there's also a bit of burley and most likely a decent amount of stoved Virginias as well (at least, I believe I'm tasting Va when I get past the first third of a bowl). It burns well and burns cool with little in the way of tongue bite. The flavor is quite robust -- there's no fear here that you'll end up with the kind of tasteless mess that many cheap aromatics turn into. I can taste loads of real tobacco with every puff .... but I also taste the flavoring, which is a highly sweet yet "earthy" addition that I can't quite identify. I think it's vanilla with perhaps some type of alcohol as well but wouldn't bet on it. 
In any case, it's fairly easy to think "mushrooms" while smoking it .... although some of that is the power of suggestion drawn from the name, there is definitely something about the flavor that reminds me of mushrooms cooked in butter!

The one drawback here is that, like many aromatics, Shortcut to Mushrooms has very little nicotine... but that probably appeals to a great many smokers (I'm still trying to kick the cigarettes for good, so my daily go-to smokers are blends like Old Joe Krantz and Kendal Flake).

I doubt Tolkien would have approved, but this is highly recommended if you want to try something ... well, REALLY different. Based on the scores of Internet postings I've seen on this one over the years, I'd say that Shortcut to Mushrooms has already become something of a cult classic, which is a status I think it richly deserves. 

This is easily a four-star aromatic, and possibly even a four-star blend when measured against more "refined" latakia mixtures. At the very least, the blender should credit for his creativity.


----------



## gibson_es (Jan 23, 2010)

I like all types of baccy. I came from cigars, and now am split 50/50

I have been smoking a pipe SERIOUSLY for about two years.


My favorite aros, that i dont wanna do without:

Boswells christmas cookie
Holiday spirit
Best of show
Maple leaf

There are others i have, i smoke, i enjoy. But these 4 are some that i cant put down once i get going. 


(Actually, theres one or two more, but in my sleep deprevation, cant recall the names, i feel assaimed. Lol)



Now, with a cigar, i can sit down, smoke, and write a highly detailed review of all the flavors, the profile, the complexity. When the flavor profile changes, ect. 

With pipe baccy, for some unknown reason, i just cant write reviews for them. So i will leave that mainly to you. I hope you review these 4 in your journey. 


But here is my input, in its unique format. 

Last year around december-ish i was trully in a hunt for a baccy that really made me think of christmas, i wanted to really feel like it was christmas time with every puff. I wanted my pipe to mentally place me in a wooden rocking chair next to a lit fire place, with stockings and a christmas tree. In a red velvety "hugh hefner" type of robe and slippers.

I tried christmas cheer first. Great stuff, but not what i was looking for. Dont get me wrong on this. Its great by the fire, and i cant go without having some on hand, its just not the answer to my search.

After trying close to 50 different baccy's. I settled on boswells christmas cookie and holiday spirit. The christmas cookie especially, did just what i wanted it too, a bowl of that while sitting in a desert would make you feel like it was christmas.

Best of show has a rich, erm, chocolate, type of flavor. 

No, i dont mean like a hershey bar. Its almost a natural type of chocolate. Though im shure its not
The best way for me to explain, is that, sometimes a cigar has a chocolaty type taste. Its not an an fused cigar. Its kinda jist, there. Naturally.

I understand that its probably not natural with the best of show. But it sure seems like it by the taste


The maple leaf.. i cant really give a discription. Its sweat, like maple syrup. But not strongly so.


----------



## doctorthoss (Jun 28, 2010)

gibson_es said:


> I like all types of baccy. I came from cigars, and now am split 50/50
> 
> I have been smoking a pipe SERIOUSLY for about two years.
> 
> ...


Curiously, the prospect of getting a few samples from Boswell's is part of the impetus for this .... I've only tried one blend of theirs, Northwoods, and it's been at the top of my rotation for several months now. I normally stick to a small handful of aros and had never tried any of their products, but I've been so impressed with Northwoods that I'm curious as to what their "bread and butter" blends are like! Christmas Cookie, Boswell's Best and Berry Cobbler are the one's I'm looking at, based on the reviews on TR....

The ones I'm planning to review in the immediate future are:
Autumn Evening
Captain Cool
Classic Burley Kake
Haddo's Delight
Barbary Coast
Town Topic
Best of Show
McClelland's Holiday 09
Vermont Maple
Low Country's Santee


----------



## gibson_es (Jan 23, 2010)

Nice list. The holiday 09 is what i love. Almost out. I ope i can find more. 

I have never had any other boswell, but i too have heard great rhings on the berry cobler.


----------



## Nick S. (Jul 10, 2011)

gibson_es said:


> Nice list. The holiday 09 is what i love.* Almost out. I ope i can find more*.
> 
> I have never had any other boswell, but i too have heard great rhings on the berry cobler.


If you are talking about Holiday Spirit, they put it out every year and it is the same from year to year.


----------



## gibson_es (Jan 23, 2010)

Yes. But i get it locally, as i only get it a tin at a time. The local shop kept sellibg out last year. I got lucky once. if i had the cash i would get multiple tins. But heres too many other thibgs i want and/or need.


----------



## bullofspadez (Jul 27, 2011)

doctorthoss said:


> Anyhow, I'm going to start with one of my favorite aromatics, Just for Him's very popular Shortcut to Mushrooms. If anyone else shows enough interest in this thread for me to continue for long, I plan on introducting a ranking system, as well.
> 
> Anyhow...
> 
> ...


I also LOVE this Aro. I can't say I have tried many Aro's that I really enjoyed. Shortcut to Mushrooms was the first tobacco I bought a whole pound of. And I try not to smoke it too often, just so it's gets the same pleasant surprise out of me. That and I only break it out when the mood for the Churchwarden.

The most recent Aro's that I have tried are McC Town Topic, 4nog Double Fantasy, 4nog Essence of Vermont. None of which I find the need to buy more of. I also have some Lane RLP-6 and McC Take 6 that I just mixed together after trying them. I LOVE the jar smell, but like the rest of the Aro's I have; they are just filler when I feel like a rut has set in.


----------



## doctorthoss (Jun 28, 2010)

Review: 4 Noggin's ESSENCE OF VERMONT

This is 4 Noggin's version of a maple-flavored aromatic. Supposedly flavored with real maple syrup and also including a helping of perique, I expected to really love this blend. Sadly, that was not to be.

First off, the base flavor struck me as being exactly the kind of bland muddle that I dislike in aromatics. I've tasted this same "mush" in plenty of aros -- it's the characteristic that makes them so disliked by so many smokers. Instead of a pleasant flavoring built on a foundation of nutty burley or sweet virginia, you instead end up with a strong dose of flavoring built on a base of ... well, a very bland, generic tobacco taste that's similar to cigarettes. The perique was noticeable, but not present in high enough amounts to do more than add a little punch to the overall presentation. A heavier hand with the perique might have served this blend well, as it could have added the "stewed fruit" flavor that perique fans like myself most enjoy.

As for the maple syrup topping ... I can't fault the blender at all here. The flavoring agent was quite tasty, and I might have actually been happier had the base tobaccos been a little more tasteless. As it was, the maple flavor was overtaken by the bland flavor of the underlying leaf. The end result was a maple-flavored mush. 

On the plus side, the burning characteristics were nice, as was the room note. There seemed to be a little more nicotine than I often find in aromatics, but it was still pretty weak in that respect. It seemed as though the potential for tongue bite was minimal for this type of blend, unless you end up furiously puffing on it to get a little more flavor!

Overall, this is a two-star blend to me. Based on the reviews on TR, I had expected something a lot better. I was also disappointed because I have a particular affection for maple aromatics and have tried a great many over the years.... Fortunately, I do think there is a four-star maple aromatic on the market, but that's another review for another day.


----------



## Mister Moo (Sep 8, 2005)

doctorthoss said:


> ...Aros are the most maligned genre of tobaccos among "serious" smokers... Why is that...?
> 
> ...easy to explain: aromatics, especially the popular American types, are usually made of crappy tobacco that's been doused in some kind dessert-flavored syrup. These tobaccos tend to burn hot, they bite, they don't carry much flavor and ...


'hoss, you asked the question and answered it. Paladin Black Cherry and Mixture79 must be very popular because they're sold all over the place. Either one of them is grounds to deride the entire genre. :target: Great review. I know there must be good ones hidden in the mix of aromatics overall, but they just don't appeal to me much or often. I concede a weak spot for Old Virginia Manassas. Love that Grand Marnier on top of burley.

I puzzle with you on some Lakelands blends. Erinmore Flake, the Juicy Fruit of tinned tobacco, is quite _aromatic_ but I still hestiate to call it "an aromatic" blend.


----------



## doctorthoss (Jun 28, 2010)

Mister Moo said:


> 'hoss, you asked the question and answered it. Paladin Black Cherry and Mixture79 must be very popular because they're sold all over the place. Either one of them is grounds to deride the entire genre. :target: Great review. I know there must be good ones hidden in the mix of aromatics overall, but they just don't appeal to me much or often. I concede a weak spot for Old Virginia Manassas. Love that Grand Marnier on top of burley.
> 
> I puzzle with you on some Lakelands blends. Erinmore Flake, the Juicy Fruit of tinned tobacco, is quite _aromatic_ but I still hestiate to call it "an aromatic" blend.


Most of them are pretty bad, aren't they? But that's the whole point of this thread -- to help us come up with a list of the better ones, and maybe even isolate what makes them work. As bad as my aromatic experiences have been, I've run into a few that are as enjoyable as a good English or Va/Per. The problem is culling the herd, so to speak. It would have saved me a lot of money (not to mention dissatisfcation) if I'd had such a resource when I started -- you know, somewhere to learn that I might enjoy Shortcut to Mushrooms but I needed to avoid Walgreen's Peach Melba like the plague!

I wouldn't hesitate to call Erinmore or any of the Lakelands "aromatics" -- they quite clearly are, or the term is meaningless, IMO. If Ennerdale, Kendal Flake, Kendal Cream Flake, both chocolate flakes, St. Bruno, etc. aren't aromatics, then I'd be loathe to call Captain Black an aro, either! My hesitation comes from the fact that some of them differ from American or Dutch-style aros to such a degree that I wonder if we shouldn't call them "British style" aromatics or something similar. In fact, maybe that's what this thread should be called -- "American and Dutch aromatic reviews." In any case, that's not a call I need to make yet. I also imagine that some might take exception to my labeling of Haddo's Delight or Exhausted Rooster as aromatics, but again I don't see how they could be described otherwise.

I've never heard of Old Virginia Manassas. Who makes it, and why do you like it? I imagine that even the purists among us have at least one or two "guilty pleasures" that we break out when the in-laws come to visit or something, and I'm curious as to what those are.


----------



## Nick S. (Jul 10, 2011)

doctorthoss said:


> *I've never heard of Old Virginia Manassas. Who makes it, and why do you like it?* I imagine that even the purists among us have at least one or two "guilty pleasures" that we break out when the in-laws come to visit or something, and I'm curious as to what those are.


Manassas is made by McClelland (I'm pretty sure) for Old Virginia Tobacco Company. I haven't seen in in a few years at my local OVTC... I thought they stopped making it...

As to the lighthearted disagreement that is beginning, I will say that since there is no absolute definition of aromatic, you have defined as you see fit (as is your right, this is your thread). I myself would disagree with some of the tobaccos you have labeled as aromatics, but according to your definition, they are. :thumb:


----------



## bullofspadez (Jul 27, 2011)

Mister Moo said:


> I puzzle with you on some Lakelands blends. Erinmore Flake, the Juicy Fruit of tinned tobacco, is quite _aromatic_ but I still hestiate to call it "an aromatic" blend.


I also agree, I really do enjoy Erinmore Flake and its almost the top of my goto pile. But I don't smoke it out of my Aro pipe either. So its an in between flavor to me as well.

ETA - I also agree Hoss, I put Bald Headed Teacher in with the Haddo's Delight and Exhausted Rooster "almost aromatic" category as well.


----------



## Mister Moo (Sep 8, 2005)

Old Virginia blends, tinned by McC for Old VA Tobacco Company B&Ms are in or out of production depending on who you talk to. I'd rate the entire line a bunch of 2-ouncers the world can live without... d'oh! Except, every once in a while I a get a ridiculous jones for Gettysburg (a strong coffee aroma from a burley/va blend) or Manassas (Grand Marnier) in a MM Legend (that I throw away later!  ). Sticky, nasty stuff but the smell and room note... what CAN I say? I'm ahead many tins of each in the cellar - lifetime supply I suppose. A bit to share. You can smell it two blocks away. Ruins my nose for anything else for a day or two.


----------



## doctorthoss (Jun 28, 2010)

Nick S. said:


> Manassas is made by McClelland (I'm pretty sure) for Old Virginia Tobacco Company. I haven't seen in in a few years at my local OVTC... I thought they stopped making it...
> 
> As to the lighthearted disagreement that is beginning, I will say that since there is no absolute definition of aromatic, you have defined as you see fit (as is your right, this is your thread). I myself would disagree with some of the tobaccos you have labeled as aromatics, but according to your definition, they are. :thumb:


I'm not sure it's a disagreement at all, personally -- I'm not sure of my definition of aromatic, either! I'd like to maybe come up with a better one as this thread progresses, so any suggestions from you would be most welcome.The one thing I really want to avoid is a definition that effectively says something like "it's an aromatic if I think it's bad but if I actually enjoy it I can't call it am aromatic." I'm not accusing you of that, btw -- it's just that I've come across many, many comments to that effect in reviews and discussions. Sometimes it seems as though we're so determined to dislike aromatics that, when we find one we like, there's no way we can actually call it by that name.


----------



## Nick S. (Jul 10, 2011)

doctorthoss said:


> I'm not sure it's a disagreement at all, personally -- I'm not sure of my definition of aromatic, either! I'd like to maybe come up with a better one as this thread progresses, so any suggestions from you would be most welcome.The one thing I really want to avoid is a definition that effectively says something like "it's an aromatic if I think it's bad but if I actually enjoy it I can't call it am aromatic." I'm not accusing you of that, btw -- it's just that I've come across many, many comments to that effect in reviews and discussions. Sometimes it seems as though we're so determined to dislike aromatics that, when we find one we like, there's no way we can actually call it by that name.


Honestly, there are a few aromatics I truly enjoy, and I am not ashamed to admit it :biggrin1:... I have no idea what a "real" definition of an aromatic would be... I wonder though since the root word of aromatic is aroma, and aromatics tend to be scented to be pleasing to those around the smoker... maybe that has something to do with why they are called aromatics... I don't know... I just usually use a Justice Stewart approach to it... I know it when I see it...


----------



## Nick S. (Jul 10, 2011)

Mister Moo said:


> Old Virginia blends, tinned by McC for Old VA Tobacco Company B&Ms are in or out of production depending on who you talk to. I'd rate the entire line a bunch of 2-ouncers the world can live without... d'oh! Except, every once in a while I a get a ridiculous jones for Gettysburg (a strong coffee aroma from a burley/va blend) or Manassas (Grand Marnier) in a MM Legend (that I throw away later!  ). Sticky, nasty stuff but the smell and room note... what CAN I say? I'm ahead many tins of each in the cellar - lifetime supply I suppose. A bit to share. You can smell it two blocks away. Ruins my nose for anything else for a day or two.


I have had the Gettysburg, but I never tried any of the others. I would agree with you though, it wasn't that good... I wanted to like them local appeal, but I didn't like Gettysburg that much and I couldn't bring myself to try tho others...


----------



## doctorthoss (Jun 28, 2010)

Okay ... here's another review of an aromatic I really enjoy: Classic Burley Cake from Russ Oulette over at Hearth and Home. 

I was terribly disappointed in this when it first came out, as I had expected a very mildly flavored burley cake from the description. What I instead got was a powerfully flavored mix of burley and VA with lots of anise and a little bit of chocolate (and maybe a little rum). After a few smokes, however, I realized that I absolutely loved the flavor of this stuff!
Equally enjoyable is the real tobacco flavor that comes through as the bowl progresses -- the burley and VA are readily detectable as distinct components. 
Russ apparently uses some kind of steam process to get the flavors into the leaf as opposed to more traditional methods of topping or using some type of cavendish. The result is the tobacco seems very moist yet burns with the ease of a drugstore burley! It also apparently eliminates any tendency of this blend to bite, as this stuff can get very hot yet I've never so much as gotten nipped by it!
This stuff gets mixed reviews on TR, but to me it's easily a three- and possibly even a four-star blend. I'm not sure it's as good as Shortcut to Mushrooms, but it is at least in the same ballpark, quality-wise. YMMV, of course!


----------



## freestoke (Feb 13, 2011)

First, I find Three Blind Moose to be one of the better aromatics not much met with around here. Burns clean and produces an almost overwhelming room note -- no, make than overwhelming room note! Butterscotch and caramel, like somebody making candy from scratch. It makes a nice "mixer" for tobaccos with a little more jolt and basic tobacco flavor, like Burley Flake #1. Probably should be classed as a "synthetic" aromatic (see below), but still not bad at all. I don't smoke much of it, but every now and then it tastes pretty good.

Second, 


doctorthoss said:


> I'm not sure it's a disagreement at all, personally -- I'm not sure of my definition of aromatic, either! I'd like to maybe come up with a better one as this thread progresses, so any suggestions from you would be most welcome.


I'd offer the that it's the use of artificial flavorings. "Real" additions, like cocoa, water-based syrups made from fruit taste quite a bit different from synthetic flavorings. For one thing, the synthetic flavorings might involve solvents other than water and they might well be part of the package when the spraying starts. They also lack complexity, because they tend to contain the primary "taste" of things, whereas fruits have more than one ester that defines the flavor. When I brought this up on another thread, I used tomatoes as the example, although tomatoes would not likely be too attractive a taste in a pipe; tomatoes have something like 15 separate esters that make up the taste, and the ratios of these esters combine to create the flavors of different strains of tomatoes, which can be very different from one another. But tomatoes are a fruit and share this trait with other fruits. Few fruits are pure "peach" or "cherry" or what have you, they are a combination of esters with a predominance of the ester that characterizes the fruit. Thus, if you create a synthetic "peach", it will be the primary ester and nothing else, whereas a peach syrup made from peaches will be more complex, less "in your face" peachy.

So my dichotomy of the aromatics is between synthetic and natural. Royal Yacht is a natural aromatic, Cherry Blend is not. There's also the matter of PG. While a little PG is in practically everything, the popular aromatics tend to be bathed in it to extend their shelf life. PG tastes just awful.


----------



## doctorthoss (Jun 28, 2010)

freestoke said:


> First, I find Three Blind Moose to be one of the better aromatics not much met with around here. Burns clean and produces an almost overwhelming room note -- no, make than overwhelming room note! Butterscotch and caramel, like somebody making candy from scratch. It makes a nice "mixer" for tobaccos with a little more jolt and basic tobacco flavor, like Burley Flake #1. Probably should be classed as a "synthetic" aromatic (see below), but still not bad at all. I don't smoke much of it, but every now and then it tastes pretty good.
> 
> Second,
> 
> ...


First, thanks for offering a thoughtful suggestion!
I kind of like the idea, although I'm not at all sure I feel there is truly always a qualitative difference between natural or artificial flavorings, at least insofar as tobacco is concerned. But my main concern is: how do we determine which blends are using truly natural flavors? Producers aren't required to disclose their ingredients, and there really isn't much in the way of regulation to make sure that what claims are made are truthful. I've also noticed that many smokers don't seem to care if we're talking about artificial or natural flavoring -- they just don't want anything but tobacco.
BTW -- where would spirits (rum, anise, etc) fit in your classification system? Or maple syrup?


----------



## Blue Raccoon (Mar 13, 2011)

Boswell's Bear Blend, Berry Cobbler and Maple Leaf, C&D Autumn Evening are always on hand.. also, PA cherry vanilla is a good OTC. 

So, for this thread is 1792 an aromatic??


----------



## notedhillbilly (Sep 30, 2011)

Blue Raccoon said:


> Boswell's Bear Blend, Berry Cobbler and Maple Leaf, C&D Autumn Evening are always on hand.. also, PA cherry vanilla is a good OTC.
> 
> So, for this thread is 1792 an aromatic??


+1 on the berry cobbler its wonderful. Just like grandma made it.


----------



## gahdzila (Apr 29, 2010)

freestoke was kind enough to send me a generous sample of 4 Noggins Lord Methley's. I did not enjoy the first bowl at ALL (partly because the flavoring was cloyingly sweet, partly because it didn't taste anything like I was expecting). I blended it with a little C&D Burley Flake #1 and tried it again, and really enjoyed it a lot! I'm now becoming more and more intrigued with aromatics. I may have to give Shortcut to Mushrooms a try sometime....I've heard nothing but good things about it. I would really like to try a chocolate if anyone has any suggestions. Boswell's baccys seem well received in general - anyone tried their Chocolate Cream? 

To add my 2 cents and maybe help someone out - I find C&D BF#1 to be very bland in the flavor department, but it has a great thick mouthfeel and it has a pretty decent nic hit. So it works great to blend with aros that are a little too heavily flavored and/or lacking in nicotine....it adds a heavier thicker mouthfeel, helps the burn, and cuts the flavor of heavy aros without adding much flavor on its own. I'm satisfied with C&D BF#1 for this purpose, but if you guys have other suggestions like this, I'm open to hear your ideas as well.


----------



## doctorthoss (Jun 28, 2010)

Blue Raccoon said:


> Boswell's Bear Blend, Berry Cobbler and Maple Leaf, C&D Autumn Evening are always on hand.. also, PA cherry vanilla is a good OTC.
> 
> So, for this thread is 1792 an aromatic??


It's a Lakeland, and I've been debating on whether those should be included. It's most certainly an aromatic, but whether there should be a special forum for Lakeland aros is what I'm unsure about. What are your thoughts?


----------



## freestoke (Feb 13, 2011)

doctorthoss said:


> First, thanks for offering a thoughtful suggestion!
> I kind of like the idea, although I'm not at all sure I feel there is truly always a qualitative difference between natural or artificial flavorings, at least insofar as tobacco is concerned. But my main concern is: how do we determine which blends are using truly natural flavors? Producers aren't required to disclose their ingredients, and there really isn't much in the way of regulation to make sure that what claims are made are truthful. I've also noticed that many smokers don't seem to care if we're talking about artificial or natural flavoring -- they just don't want anything but tobacco.
> BTW -- where would spirits (rum, anise, etc) fit in your classification system? Or maple syrup?


This might be germane here:

What is an English Pipe Tobacco Blend? | With Pipe and Pen

The Tobacco Purity Laws were repealed in the 1980s, so now GBritain is free to make horrific schlock just like the US! :lol:

I agree that synthesized vanilla and maple syrup flavorings would be almost indistinguishable from the real deal, but I wonder about more complex flavors like grapes (raisins), figs and cocoa. (Grape Nehi tastes like no grape I ever ate!) What I would be curious about would be the solvents used in their production. Maybe it's just water! :dunno:

Anyhow, I suspect the British manufacturers are still sticking to their original recipes for the most part. Royal Yacht, even produced by Orlik, probably still conforms to the pre-1980s Tobacco Purity Laws, making it a "natural" aromatic English tobacco.


----------



## doctorthoss (Jun 28, 2010)

freestoke said:


> This might be germane here:
> 
> What is an English Pipe Tobacco Blend? | With Pipe and Pen
> 
> ...


Thanks for the link! I've read a lot of articles on the British purity laws, and I'm still not quite sure what they permitted or forbade. Personally, I feel the two most heavily flavored tobaccos I've ever tried to be 1792 and Dark Flake Aromatic -- while I actually like the flavor profiles, they make many American aros seem like models of restraint. The author of this article's definition of aromatic, however, doesn't strike me as overly useful as I would be inclined to include Haddo's Delight, 965 and the Original Balkan Sobranie mixture under the category of "aromatic" (I could be missing something, of course).


----------



## doctorthoss (Jun 28, 2010)

Well, it's been quite awhile since I updated this...Sorry it's been so long, but I had some health issues and assorted personal drama to sort through. Anyhow.... here are reviews of five aros, two of which I recommend and three of which I really do NOT recommend.

Hearth and Home's Classic Burley Cake

To read the blend's description, one might conclude this is some kind of lightly flavored burley flake like the drugstore baccys of days gone by. No --this is an aromatic. But the difference between this and most others is that the steam processing used to flavor the tobacco (instead of traditional casing methods) accomplishes that alchemical goal that aromatic makes always promise but almost never deliver: It tastes just like it smells, and the flavor lasts all the way to the bottom of the bowl. This comes in loosely packed, moist cakes that crumble easy and gravity pack like a dream. It also lights and burns very easily. It does burn hot, but interestingly enough I find very, very little bite potential here. The primary flavors are of cocoa, anise and vanilla followed by the burley and virginia. You can taste the tobacco here, it's just kind of muted under all the flavoring agents. Like the Lakelands, this comes down to how you feel about the flavorings. If you like them, it's awesome. If this combination doesn't appeal to you, then skip it. Personally, I think it's one of the best aromatics I've ever tried. Heck, it even holds its own when compared to the burlies, VA/Pers and Englishes I normally smoke. My one complaint is that I wish it had more nicotine.

MIDDLETON'S CHERRY

Of all the cherry flavored tobaccos I've tried (not that many, to be fair) this is by far the best. Unfortunately, that's still not very good. It appears they've taken Prince Albert as a base and then drenched it in some kind cherry syrup that reminds me of the stuff we buy at Walgreens to give my daughter when she catches a cold. This medicinal flavor is pretty gross -- it seems to even affect the blend's texture and leaves us a nasty coating on my tongue by the end of the pipe. All that being said, it burns well and surprisingly doesn't seem to bite much. 

GATLIN-BURLIER MOUNTAIN MAPLE

The Gatlin-Burlier is one of my favorite B&Ms (located, predictably enough, in Gatlinburg, TN). I've been going there for 20 years, and for my first decade of smoking they supplied me with 90 percent or more of what I smoked. Suffice it to say, I'm fairly well acquainted with their house blends, most of which are aromatics with a small number of crossovers and Englishes mixed in (I smoked one of their English mixtures almost exclusively for a number of years, but that's another story). Most of their aromatics are of a fairly high quality -- this isn't one of those, I'm afraid. The problem is that this is a pretty generic, bulk aromatic that seems to rely on the kind of hot-burning casing that gives this genre a bad name. The flavoring tastes decent enough, I suppose, but the heat builds to intolerable levels in only a few minutes and leaves nothing but scorching hot air going into your mouth. Does it bite? Oh yeah. So, this isn't one I can recommend, although I wouldn't let that deter you from trying some of their other products. Which leads me to....

GATLIN-BURLIER CADES COVE CAVENDISH

Gatlin-Burlier produces two blends that have built up a respectable following: the eponymous house blend, a quasi-aro American English dubbed Gatlin-Burley, and this stuff -- Cades Cove Cavendish. This is a very sweet, very heavily cased golden-hued ribbon that arrives moist in the pouch and will likely remain that way until the Earth is taken over by cockroaches and Keith Richards. The good news is that it tastes pretty darn good. I don't know what the casing is -- it's a little like vanilla, a little like marshmallows, a little like cotton candy, and a little like pure cane sugar. But whatever it is, it actually maintains some of that sweet flavor all the way to the bottom of the bowl. This stuff is fairly well-behaved, as well, and doesn't scorch your mouth no matter how hard you puff. I'm told by the guys who work there that Cades Cove Cavendish is traditionally their biggest seller. Well, that honor should go to the aforementioned Gatlin-Burley, but if you want to try a good bulk aromatic in the traditional American style this is one of the best examples I've come across.

CAPTAIN BLACK WHITE

This is probably the best-selling pipe tobacco in America, so I know that someone out there likes it. In the pouch, I can almost understand why -- the stuff smells incredible. It's obvious that it's heavily cased in some kind of chemical vanilla crap, but it's some of the best-smelling chemical vanilla crap I've ever come across. The tobacco itself is dark, moist and ... well, heavy. It's also somewhat sticky, and you can practically feel the PG rubbing off on your fingers when you load the pipe. It lights easily enough, and the first few puffs are actually fairly enjoyable. Sadly, it all does downhill from there.... Within five minutes or so, the vanilla taste is replaced by a kind of vague sweetness with an aftertaste that makes me think of burnt plastic. This only gets worse as the bowl progresses. The heat from the bowl starts to get out of hand at about the 15 minute mark, which is just as well because 15 minutes is about as long as I can tolerate this stuff. 
Obviously, most pipe smokers don't share my opinion, but this just isn't something I would buy or smoke on a regular basis, especially when there are much better aros out there. In all fairness, though, it does have two things going for it. One, it's easily available -- you can buy it at Wal-Mart, at drugstores and even at many convenience stores. Second, the aroma IS very, very nice. I've yet to meet a member of the fairer sex who didn't absolutely love the way this stuff smells, even going so far as to hang on my shoulder so they can lean in close just to get a better whiff of .... hey, wait a minute -- I think I just figured out why this stuff sells!


----------



## freestoke (Feb 13, 2011)

doctorthoss said:


> CAPTAIN BLACK WHITE
> Sadly, it all does downhill from there.... Within five minutes or so, the vanilla taste is replaced by a kind of vague sweetness with an aftertaste that makes me think of burnt plastic. This only gets worse as the bowl progresses. The heat from the bowl starts to get out of hand at about the 15 minute mark, which is just as well because 15 minutes is about as long as I can tolerate this stuff.


:biglaugh: So does it improve with age, John?


----------



## freestoke (Feb 13, 2011)

I worked pretty hard to prevent this dupe, even opening a new tab and checking the group to see if my post had shown up after being rejected for errors. Another interesting side effect is that I didn't seem to be credited with either post in my post count. :ask:


----------



## doctorthoss (Jun 28, 2010)

freestoke said:


> I worked pretty hard to prevent this dupe, even opening a new tab and checking the group to see if my post had shown up after being rejected for errors. Another interesting side effect is that I didn't seem to be credited with either post in my post count. :ask:


???


----------



## freestoke (Feb 13, 2011)

doctorthoss said:


> ???


It started as a dupe of the post before it. When I wrote the original reply, it asked me if I wanted to leave the page after I hit the submit button, so I said yes, since I had been here before, ie, saying "no", then resubmitting, winding up with two identical posts. It then reported an error. Not to be fooled again, I opened the threadlist in a new window, went to the this thread and found that it did not show my post. So I hit the submit button again, only to find TWO stinking identical posts. So I freaked and wrote my little rant.

Sorry to mess up this thread, John.  I've really been enjoying it!


----------



## doctorthoss (Jun 28, 2010)

freestoke said:


> It started as a dupe of the post before it. When I wrote the original reply, it asked me if I wanted to leave the page after I hit the submit button, so I said yes, since I had been here before, ie, saying "no", then resubmitting, winding up with two identical posts. It then reported an error. Not to be fooled again, I opened the threadlist in a new window, went to the this thread and found that it did not show my post. So I hit the submit button again, only to find TWO stinking identical posts. So I freaked and wrote my little rant.
> 
> Sorry to mess up this thread, John.  I've really been enjoying it!


No worries -- you didn't mess anything up! I was just a little confused.


----------



## Irfan (Dec 18, 2011)

I've always used "aromatic" as short-hand for "scented OTC tobacco that bites the tongue": very unfair, I've probably just tried the common, mass market ones (Captain Black, Borkum Riff). Honestly, if those were the first tobaccos that I'd ever tried, I would have thrown the pipe away in disgust. BR Ultra Mild, particularly: even in a Calabash, it bites! I don't get that with Irish Flake, how do they do it? do they add some chemical to make it burn hotter? At one stage, when I got a sampler pack from CnD, I included a sample of Very Berry, for my former wife (a bit of an exhibitionist, she only liked smoking it in public!). I did try a bowl of that, it wasn't so bad, but not what I look for. I wouldn't mind trying a few again now, though, now that I'm getting a bit more adventurous and experimental.


----------



## karatekyle (Nov 2, 2010)

Great reviews! Good aromatics are tough to find, it's nice to have some guidance!


----------



## doctorthoss (Jun 28, 2010)

Thanks for the encouragement, guys! I'm gonna need it if I'm actually gonna this finish this project anytime soon (the Cherry almost did me in LOL).

In keeping with the tradition of similar review threads I've seen, I'm going to start a ranking system to help organize my thoughts and preferences. I'm sure it will change a little over time, but the idea is to simply list them in order from the absolute best to the absolute worst, based on my highly subjective tastes. Here's what I've got so far:

1. Shortcut to Mushrooms by Just For Him
2. Classic Burley Cake by Hearth and Home
3. Cades Cove Cavendish by Gatlin-Burlier
4. Captain Black White
5. Essence of Vermont by 4 Noggins
6. Cherry by Middleton
7. Mountain Maple by Gatlin-Burlier

I've smoked several other aromatics since then and kept detailed notes, so I'll post them as I get around to writing them. Before this, I rarely smoked more than 1-2 bowls a week of aromatics, and even having doubled that amount it's going to take awhile to do this (like most of us, I prefer non-aros, semi-aros or Lakelands in my pipes -- I'm afraid this much black cavendish is going to fry my taste buds LOL).


----------



## Jogi (Dec 4, 2009)

freestoke said:


> :biglaugh: So does it improve with age, John?


It does, as a matter of fact, moderately though. I have a pouch-worth of the White and the Royal each, put away in mason-jars, since May or June, 2010. They've really learned to behave themselves now. No bite unless puffed REALLY hard, I'd even go out on a limb and say that their flavor too, has improved quite a bit (as compared to the ORIGINAL tastelessness).

I dunno what keeping Captain Black for so long makes me look/sound like, but I just loved the pouch aroma and couldn't throw it away. It isn't bad at all now. The same amazing aroma, the same creamy thick smoke, without the bite... Of course there are tobaccos out there that would turn out to be miracles after aging, but this was just an experiment that turned out ok. :nod:


----------



## freestoke (Feb 13, 2011)

Jogi said:


> It does, as a matter of fact, moderately though. I have a pouch-worth of the White and the Royal each, put away in mason-jars, since May or June, 2010. They've really learned to behave themselves now. No bite unless puffed REALLY hard, I'd even go out on a limb and say that their flavor too, has improved quite a bit (as compared to the ORIGINAL tastelessness).
> 
> I dunno what keeping Captain Black for so long makes me look/sound like, but I just loved the pouch aroma and couldn't throw it away. It isn't bad at all now. The same amazing aroma, the same creamy thick smoke, without the bite... Of course there are tobaccos out there that would turn out to be miracles after aging, but this was just an experiment that turned out ok. :nod:


Oh, SURE! Make me want some! Go right ahead! Every time I read a review that finally lets me write off the Captain and his blackguard crew forever, there's always the guy (like YOU! oke who chimes in and makes me question my judgment.

:typing: "Scotty! The sensors show TAD creating subspace interference. Beam me up." :lever: :rapture:


----------



## Jogi (Dec 4, 2009)

freestoke said:


> Oh, SURE! Make me want some! Go right ahead! Every time I read a review that finally lets me write off the Captain and his blackguard crew forever, there's always the guy (like YOU! oke who chimes in and makes me question my judgment.
> 
> :typing: "Scotty! The sensors show TAD creating subspace interference. Beam me up." :lever: :rapture:


:tongue1:

I'm a total noob (4 cobs and only OTCs so far, first briar on its way) and I started smoking very infrequently in mid-2010 (hence the old Captain Black). I dunno if my smoking technique has improved or these tobaccos actually have toned down a bit, but I do feel that they are much better than before.

So far I've smoked Captain Black's White and Royal, Erinmore Mixture and Flake, and Amphora Full Aroma (Red Pouch). Except Amphora, all these tobaccos have at least one year age. Captain Blacks are ok, Erinmore Mixture still sucks, a BIT less though, but Erinmore Flake?? I'm *loving* it!! The flakes are quite dry now, they break easily, but do not crumble like over-dried tobacco. So I rub a flake out coarsely, fill up a cob and it's 20 minutes of heaven!!!

When I first tried Amphora after getting my first pipes, i thought it tasted horrible, tongue bite, all ashy and wet, smelt and tasted like cigarette smoke. After reading very good things about it recently, and how people now miss it in the States, I decided to give it a go once again. And I have to say it's AMAZING. Actual tobacco flavor, with very light and pleasant flavoring, and a decent room note. Cool burning, and I was actually able to smoke all the way down to the bottom of the bowl for the first time. And when I exhale through the nose, I can really sense the subtle citrusy, chocolatey notes Amphora's fans talk so much about!!

From what I've experienced, if someone asks me if OTCs like the Captain are a good place to start pipe smoking, I'll say, with all the humbleness of a noob, yes, *but ONLY* if they're gonna air the tobacco really well before smoking (spread it out in a dinner plate and air it *at LEAST* overnight), pack it really lightly (or don't pack it at all, just drop it in the bowl till it's full and then level it with LIGHT touch) and puff SLOW.


----------



## doctorthoss (Jun 28, 2010)

Jogi said:


> :tongue1:
> 
> I'm a total noob (4 cobs and only OTCs so far, first briar on its way) and I started smoking very infrequently in mid-2010 (hence the old Captain Black). I dunno if my smoking technique has improved or these tobaccos actually have toned down a bit, but I do feel that they are much better than before.
> 
> ...


Have you tried Carter Hall or Prince Albert?


----------



## Jogi (Dec 4, 2009)

No doc, the only OTCs available in my side of the world are the ones I've mentioned. And I know I'm missing these simple, no-frills, honest-to-goodness smoking experience by not having these two baccys. :smash:

My posts may have sounded like threadjackin', :tongue1: so now back to you doc :focus:


----------



## doctorthoss (Jun 28, 2010)

Jogi said:


> No doc, the only OTCs available in my side of the world are the ones I've mentioned. And I know I'm missing these simple, no-frills, honest-to-goodness smoking experience by not having these two baccys. :smash:
> 
> My posts may have sounded like threadjackin', :tongue1: so now back to you doc :focus:


I don't think you're threadjackin -- the whole point hear was to talk about the aromatics we do or don't like and why/why not.


----------



## doctorthoss (Jun 28, 2010)

A couple of new reviews:

McClelland HOLIDAY SPIRIT

The tin description says this is "Burley, Virginia and Cavendish tobaccos, flavored with dark rum, pecans and cocoa for the 2008 Holiday season." The tin note is delicious -- very spicy, and it's quite easy to imagine smoking this under the proverbial mistletoe. It's moist and it doesn't seem to dry out much, so I assume there's a good amount of PG in it. When I fire it up, I definitely taste the flavorings first and foremost, and they are really tasty. There's also some tobacco flavor in there, albeit very muted. It really doesn't change much as it goes down the bowl. It does get a bit hot and it's a little nippy, but nothing too drastic. The only real complaint I have is that it gets kind of boring after awhile -- it just doesn't seem to live up to the promise of the first few draws. I don't plan on buying anymore, but it's still pretty decent stuff and I would recommend it for those folks who feel inclined to celebrate the holidays with an aromatic.

Cornell and Diehl's CAPT. BOB'S BLEND

The description for this one is "a blend of Virginias and Burleys with just a dash of Latakia and Perique and finished with a refreshing flavor." That refreshing flavor is apparently some kind of grape soda, and it really isn't all that refreshing. In fact, I found the flavor of this one to be pretty gross and heavy-handed. It burned VERY hot and scorched my palate. I had hoped for a lightly flavored American English blend (a genre I have a soft spot for) but I really didn't pick up much in the way of latakia or perique. I love C&D as a blender, but this aromatic was very disappointing. 


New rankings:
1. Shortcut to Mushrooms by Just For Him
2. Classic Burley Cake by Hearth and Home
3. Cades Cove Cavendish by Gatlin-Burlier
4. Christmas Spirit by McClelland
5. Captain Black White
6. Essence of Vermont by 4 Noggins
7. Cherry by Middleton
8. Capt. Bob's Blend by C&D
9. Mountain Maple by Gatlin-Burlier


----------



## phenderstrat (Feb 25, 2012)

doctorthoss said:


> MIDDLETON'S CHERRY
> 
> Of all the cherry flavored tobaccos I've tried (not that many, to be fair) this is by far the best. Unfortunately, that's still not very good. It appears they've taken Prince Albert as a base and then drenched it in some kind cherry syrup that reminds me of the stuff we buy at Walgreens to give my daughter when she catches a cold. This medicinal flavor is pretty gross -- it seems to even affect the blend's texture and leaves us a nasty coating on my tongue by the end of the pipe. All that being said, it burns well and surprisingly doesn't seem to bite much.


In response to this, I'd like to add a couple reviews from Boswell's fine selection. The first being a cherry blend 

Pennsylvania Dutch Treat

Dutch Treat is a burley/cavendish blend which has a distinctive cherry pouch aroma that translates into a definitive yet not overpowering cherry taste, accompanied by a nutty and almost dark chocolate undertone. These flavors and aromas meld together wonderfully, on the palette and for the room note. It is not an everyday smoke of mine, but when in the mood for a "dessert" smoke, this is one I turn to often. This smoked dry for me with no bite down to the bottom of the bowl; it had no moisture or dottle leftovers but, can burn hot if smoked aggressively. I am very pleased, as would be, any aromatic lover who enjoys a natural fruity taste.

Boswell's Best

Boswell's Best is a mild yet satisfying smoke for me. I detect a hint of vanilla in the pouch which is a mixture of black and gold cavendishes, and a string cut virginia. It has a mild yet definitive tobacco taste which is mixed with a gentle creamy, nutty sweetness. It's not an "overt" aromatic... but for me, is an all day smoke which yields a quality tobacco taste with a hint of sweetness. It generally burns dry and without any bite, unless over packed, or "power puffed".

That's it for now, I will add more when I have some additional time.


----------



## doctorthoss (Jun 28, 2010)

phenderstrat said:


> In response to this, I'd like to add a couple reviews from Boswell's fine selection. The first being a cherry blend
> 
> Pennsylvania Dutch Treat
> 
> ...


Thanks for chiming! Curiously enough, I have a two-ounce sample bag of Boswell's Best I haven't sample yet.


----------

